5 ms·
It's honestly hard to understand what our discussion is about at this point. I stated initially Rossman is fighting about his ability to buy working parts and d
by slver 5y ago
It's honestly hard to understand what our discussion is about at this point. I stated initially Rossman is fighting about his ability to buy working parts and doing repair. Now turns out you agree with that. So, I guess that's all.
- danShumway 5y agoThe disagreement is over whether your point changes anything at all about the right to repair movement. Okay, let's say Rossman is fighting for his own ability to do repair. So? That's what we want. Every consumer benefits if there's a competitive repair industry. In particular the people who can't do their own repairs at home benefit from a competitive 3rd-party repair industry. Giving Apple a monopoly over its repair process is bad for consumers. It's bad overall no matter what Apple devices look like, but it's particularly bad if the devices are difficult or impossible to repair at home. The fact that consumer devices are getting harder to repair is exactly why third-party repair shops are so important, and exactly why Rossman's goals align with those of the average consumer. Because as devices get harder to repair, it becomes more important that consumers have access to a wide range of professionals that can do those repairs. I think you're getting pushback because you keep refusing to engage with the arguments that people are making, repeating "the age of generic parts is over", and then acting like that changes something about the current situation. It doesn't. You seem to be missing the connecting logic between your own point and the surrounding debate about right to repair.